Not 1 but 2 new terminals for Dublin Airport

[Sky_Captain]

News announced this morning in the Irish Independant, so is this a good or a bad thing:

Months of wrangling end with acompromise on two new terminals

THE Coalition is expected to end months of wrangling over aviation policy today when the Cabinet approves a deal for the provision of a second terminal at Dublin Airport.

A compromise has emerged between Taoiseach Bertie Ahern's desire to leave control in the hands of the Dublin Airport Authority and Tanaiste Mary Harney's eagerness for competition and private ownership.

The second terminal will be built by the Dublin Airport Authority but a tendering process will be put in place to decide who runs and operates it.

In addition, in what is viewed by the Progressive Democrats as an important concession to their demands for competition, a plan has been worked out for a third terminal at the airport which will be an exclusively private sector venture.

Both parties are anxious to conclude a deal on one of the most controversial issues Fianna Fail and the PDs have faced in their eight years in government together - one which has led to accusations of "dithering" and "indecision" by opposition parties and Ryanair boss, Michael O'Leary.

The difficulties have largely centred on the question of ownership and operation of the second terminal at the airport as part of a major aviation reform package.

The final elements of the plan were being worked out last night by officials in both parties and are expected to be passed by the Cabinet before a formal announcement by Mr Cullen.

The minister, working closely with the Taoiseach, has insisted all along that the second terminal, as an important national asset, must be built and owned by the State. Ms Harney has said the element of competition, rather than ownership, is uppermost in her mind and has been demanding that the second terminal be independently-operated.

The Taoiseach said last week there had been agreement on this aspect of the deal as long ago as Christmas.

The future of Aer Lingus is also at issue. But, in contrast to the terminal question, there has been little or no disagreement between Fianna Fail and the PDs about the need for a majority stake in the airline to be sold to provide funding for investment in its long-haul fleet.

And the Coalition parties have also agreed that the Pier D extension at Dublin airport will go ahead and should be in place within three years.

The target date for completion of the second terminal is 2009 while the third terminal is earmarked for completion by the year 2015 at the latest.

[akerosid]

Definitely a good thing! The main concern I had was that in focusing on ownership and competition, they were going to lose sight of capacity. If this announcement is made and carried through (not necessarily automatic), then DUB should have the capacity it needs for all future growth.

I have no doubt that the DAA needs competition; it gives the impression of an organisation that simply isn't challenged. The government gives the DAA a pretty free hand (that's going to have to stop), with the result that the airport has a runway about 1500' shorter than it needs to be and freight facilities which aren't going to meet future demand - but neither of these were addressed in the DAA's ten year investment plan. The only way to deal with an organisation like this is to get competition in. The fact that it hasn't been done before isn't an excuse: there's no reason why a structure cannot be found which will work.

My personal preference: get the DAA out of terminal management/operation altogether, so that they would be responsible for the airfield operation - the regulatory side, security, emergency services, runway maintenance etc; this would be funded by the rent/service charges paid by the individual terminal operators.

In this way, the airport would still be in state control, but you'd have competition and more importantly, a level playing field, because the terminal operators would be focused on the specific areas of terminal management, customer service and marketing.

[apaddyinuk]

I am however worried that this will make Dublin Airport something of a patchwork quilt with terminals in no specific arrangement making it a very awkward airport to negotiate. But then I keep thinking of the greater good and the knowledge that dublin needs this!

[Sky_Captain]

I agree, it may become patchy, but it will help. Sure what do you expect from Dublin. Interesting idea akerosid, but imagine this. Second terminal run by competition and operational by 2009, Rwy 28R/10L (12000+ feet) operational by 2009, and the third terminal being built by the cargo operators :eek:

And Voila, a proper, International Airport :ooh:

S.C. :ok:

[TwoDeadDogs]

Hello all
if DAA wanted to improve passenger access, then they should build a direct access to Pier C.At present, anyone flying out from Pier C has to pass thru Pier B's security screen and shopping area. There is a car-park in front of C which could easily be changed to admit foot access to the Pier. Personally,I prefer McEvaddy's idea of a terminal on the St. Margaret's side of the airport. MoL's notion of flattening all the hangars and ancillary buildings will wreak havoc upon normal ground operations. How much is he willing to pay SR Technics to evacuate the hangars and relocate?.
regards
TDD

[akerosid]

Speaking in the Dail today, the Dear Leader said ...

that in the
longer term other issues affecting the
airport needed to be addressed.

The Government is expected to approve a
set of measures for the aviation
industry, including the partial sale of
Aer Lingus and the issue of the second
terminal.

What other issues I wonder? New freight facilities, longer runway, ground transport? With regard to the runway, the new one won't open until 2012 at the earliest. Now, that means we're stuck with the shortest runway of any major European city until then, which is going to cut back on the potential to add new cities. I'm really surprised that this isn't getting the coverage it needs? The new lobby group, Grounded Ireland, is trying to bring attention to this issue - but it would be great if we had authoritative support from the likes of IALPA. It's just not being taken seriously.

As for the package, as far as I can see, all that's being considered is the terminal issue and a commitment to privatise part of EI at some stage in the future; is this a package? What about the increased US access, that the minister himself alluded to quite recently?

We can't really have this kind of dithering again. I'm firmly of the belief that the difference between Ireland and the likes of Singapore, HK etc. is not so much competence/ability, but interest and vision and that's what we need to work on. If the govt showed the commitment to aviation that it does to NI - clarity of vision and disclpline of purpose, aviation would be far better able to serve our needs.

[akerosid]

The decision has been announced this evening.

Two terminals: one on the north terminal site, to be open by 2009, built by the DAA but operation to be put out to tender.

There will be a Pier D at the existing terminal.

Terminal 3, planning for which will begin immediately, will be open by 2015.

The combination of the above means that DUB should have the capacity it needs to meet all growth for the foreseeable future.

The govt has already announced the privatisation of a significant stake in Aer Lingus.

There may be more aspects to it (hopefully a decision on improved t/a access.)

[MarkD]

akerosid

why do you need three terminals "for capacity". One good one (YYZ T1 or LHR T5, you pick) will do the job.

This is madness pure and simple. It compromises an opportunity to rebuild T1 as a proper terminal and instead it will be scrimping and scraping to build lowest cost sheds and people still won't be able to transfer between flights at T1.

[Sky_Captain]

Well its starting to sound worse and worse. The second terminal is being built by the DAA (Bad Idea), and its been announced that the DAA can also bid with other tenders for operational control of terminal two :yuk: Not very fair me thinks :uhoh:

The third terminal will be looked in to by the govermwnt, but according to news reports last night, no judgement on a start date will be given until the goverment is happy that there is significant numbers of passengers soon to be in need of a third terminal.

I think the goverment is just pulling a fast one, and the DAA bid for main operational control of the second terminal will be granted. :{

S.C.

[akerosid]

Mark, there simply isn't the room for a decently sized new terminal where the DAA wants to put it (where the old hangars are now). One of my concerns, a while back, was that it would not be able to meet the capacity needs going forward.

The new T3 will be able to do that.

Of course, I fear there is a risk that once the PDs have been dumped, a new minister can come in and say "oh, that's not going to work, let's give it all to the DAA." Personally, I think the only way to make the DAA provide a good standard of pax service is to have competition.

Incidentally, just reading some of the comments this morning, I saw this one:Cullen said: "This decision allows Aer Lingus to secure funding for new aircraft and in turn to compete and win new routes."

Win new routes?
The only new routes they wanted to win are those which the government won't let them start on ... where were those new US rights that were spoken of?

[Tom the Tenor]

Once the ministerial pensions are secured the PDs will be dumped.

Also, do not forget that whatever happens there is an agenda out there too to protect the snn gang for as long as possible.

Snn is organised to the hilt and this means Dublin and especially Cork will come off second best. Bertie is scared of the Dublin airport unions and the Cork crowd and most local politicians are are either weak or are not interested.

[Sky_Captain]

"This decision allows Aer Lingus to secure funding for new aircraft and in turn to compete and win new routes."
Plus you have to make sure the new routes are no longer than the DUB-LAX route, or else the F:mad: g "old dear" cabin crew of EI will refuse to work it. Since they and their union have already put a halt to the cape town possibility, and it is believed they are responsible for the stopping of the DUB-MCO route. A route that I love to use for my vacations :{ :{

S.C. :{

[asianfly]

"Significantly, the terms of an agreement reached last year committing Government and unions to maintaining pay and conditions and trade union rights at the airport will be among the criteria to be met by those seeking to run the second terminal. This eases the fears of airport staff that a new terminal would result in staff and pay cuts as the terminals sought to undercut each other."

What a joke! Given the fantastic service DUB currently offers, I am sure the new terminal will offer more of the same!

[MarkD]

Akerosid

the "T2" should then only be a temporary affair to allow the various bits of T1 to be rebuilt with the aim of eventually negating the need for T2, and eliminating it. T1 and T3 should be the only two terminals going forward.

Instead there will need to be new road systems built to accomodate this farce. All this and continued faffing about the rail link. Bah!

[ProfJackRabbit]

A new terminal by 2009? I'll believe when I see it. My bets are on 2019 rather....

[Irish Steve]

Talk about political expediency!!!

All I've seen and heard so far is political smoke and mirrors, and promises of "more to come". which will probably be when the spin doctors have spent weeks trying to get the entire subject out of the spotlight of media attention.

Right now, Bertie and the entire gang are running scared. They know they have to do something, that much has been recognised, and Bertie's been making noises today that "manning practises will have to be different, and that's been recognised" Oh? Who by?

The politicians are runing scared of the SNN lobby, and the unions, so they don't really want to commit to anything. In a few weeks time, I think they will come out with the real truth, and that's likely to be nowhere near what's really needed.

Then of course, there's the MoL scenario. There's the distinct possibility that before too long, he's not going to be quite as visible as he has been recently, so Bertie's not going to say anything too clear and specific until MoL is sidelined one way or the other.

Then there's the EI scenario. EI have chopped a very popular route in recent days because they can't get it operated sensibly, there are crewing issues, and the SNN stop is a pure cost with no benefit to anyone, it doesn't even get on to a gate at SNN.

Most of the related issues, runways, communications, parking, freight apron space, cargo handling facilities and the like are being ignored. The DAA is another subject, and one that needs some serious attention, given their recent track record!

If T2 goes ahead as outlined, DUB loses a large chunk of it's hangar space. I've not seen them empty, so where are all the aircraft that use them now going to go?

As ususal, they've been very clever, by saying almost nothing, and obscuring the real issues.

People need to keep the pressure on them, and not let them get away with the fudge that's going on at the moment.

It's up to the people of Ireland to make it clear to the politicians that they can't ignore this issue, and to recognise that they have to push this if Ireland is to remain in the fast lane of European growth. Unfortunately, it IS that simple. Mess about with the links to the USA, and Europe, and the inward investment will go to countries that make it easy to get to them, and right now, with the state of the airports, and the nonsense of the SNN stop, Ireland is sending the wrong message to potential investors.

Hopefully, they've got people advising them that will make that clear.

[Sky_Captain]

It's up to the people of Ireland to make it clear to the politicians that they can't ignore this issue
I don't know Steve, when does a politician listen to the people in their constituency :confused:
You'd have a better conversation with a brick wall, maybe we should see about getting MoL and other voices heard instead of talking to bertie?

S.C.

[akerosid]

With regard to the stopover, I am very disappointed that there was nothing done, particularly as the minister had referred to the possibility of increased US access for EI. I can only imagine that it was due to problems getting agreement from the Americans.

Of course, they can choose to do nothing about it and wait until the EU and US reach a deal. I've had recent correspondence with the EU Commission and have been told that they are working very quickly towards that and the EU's dropping of its cabotage demand should help towards that. Once that deal is done, it's a free for all. There's nothing the govt can do to hold things back. The only obstacle to EI's growth will be ... EI.

However, for SNN, it means a sudden drenching in the icy waters of open skies - no transitional period. Is that what the govt wants? Surely it would be better to have a phased approach. The govt's choice, of course, but there's nothing they will be able to do to stand, Canute-like, before the oncoming tide of liberalised transatlantic access.

And for God's sake, can't they do something about the Canadian bilateral!!!

If Aer Lingus doesn't get its act together on its long haul fleet, then others will come in. VS flies three times a day to MCO; do you think they won't consider basing a few A340s in DUB for US flights? Or bmi, particularly if they can't get rights ex-LHR.

As for the airport, one thing concerns me: the third terminal will be built, we're told, if demand justifies it. It will be operated, most likely by a competitor to the current operators. So, if they grow traffic, their efforts will result in a competing terminal. Yeah, that'll work as an incentive. In order to stop this happening, the DAA (including whoever is operating T2) need only keep the existing two terminals flatlining below the 30m mark. That means holding back on marketing efforts. We lose.